Are Racial Attitudes Part of the Problem?
We learned a valuable lesson this week, President Obama must run a flawless, almost perfect campaign, or the progressive and liberal punditry will throw his ass under the bus quicker than Fox News can clear up another Romney policy misstatement. After what was a pretty boring and non-eventful debate last week, the right-wing pundits quickly proclaimed victory for Romney and touted it as the game-changer the challenger needed. “We have a new race,” they exclaimed.
And what did our beloved progressive punditry do? They threw the first African-American President of the United States under the bus, because he had a somewhat, and only somewhat, flat performance in a debate. But was President Obama so beat on Dodd-Frank, or the tax-cut question, or Medicare, or any issue that it could change the race?. Did Romney really “win” on any real issue, other than being more energetic? No.
Think of what you remember about the debate. Do you remember Romney getting the upper hand on any policy, or just frustrated that President Obama wasn’t more forceful in refuting his lies? Only Al Sharpton, Christopher Hayes and Lawrence O’Donnell really went after Romney on the lies and defended the President. Ed Shultz, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews just threw him under the bus like an overpaid athlete that had one bad game after a string of victories.
The debate was no slam dunk for Romney, until the left-wing pundits abandoned any pretense that they actually cared about issues and policy, and just followed the right by calling Romney the winner on style points alone. A poll conducted immediately after the debate by CBS, which included the option of “tie,” proves this point. In that poll only 46% said that Romney won the debate, with 22% for Obama, and 32% calling it a tie. It was only after the media began it’s spin that opinion shifted toward some huge night for Romney.
Why did the progressive talking heads so easily capitulate to the right-wing? It’s hard to make any sense of, but it just doesn’t feel right. Every issue and policy that they have supported over the years, President Obama still champions. Could it be that they see President Obama as the “help,” as U of mass. Professor John H. Bracey explains in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_-clq87VfU.
Do they see Obama as the “help?” Is that what caused the level of disappointment after the debate? After standing up for this black man this is how he repays them. Is that what they were thinking? Because nothing else explains their behavior. Is that why they so quickly, and so easily joined the racist Fox News in portraying the debate as some massive win for Romney?
Please tell me if I’m wrong. Please tell me you weren’t a bit, or a lot surprised by their sudden and strong anger at President Obama. Why didn’t they, as I did the day after, point out that nothing changed with regard to the issues that led to President Obama’s lead in the polls? Why did they abandon President Obama so quickly that even Saturday Night Live mocked them?
If a less than stellar debate performance, one month out from the election is all it takes for Chris Matthews, an old, white, male, Irish Catholic from Boston to all of a sudden diminish and berate our first black President, maybe it’s time to reexamine which so-called progressives are speaking out.
For a much better explanation of why President Obama did not go for the jugular in the debate, I think my story from last Thursday does the job: http://politicsandabeer.blogspot.com/2012/10/romney-won-debate-but-on-what-issues.html